|
reply posted on 29-3-2009 @ 07:45 AM by kshaund
|
reply to post by rich23
Yes, I saw that latest video - but again, its he said/she said back and forth. There was also a picture of him in an office with a picture of a lab -
quite the contradiction from Rutter's acquaintances swearing he doesn't hike or ever had a dog... ?
The other thing with hoaxes, the more people involved the easier it is to have it fall apart - Reed's hoax would include how many? His landlord,
friend, a few now deceased people? Whoever else says they saw the artifact. It's too many people - easier to keep a hoax going with only one, two
people max... don't you think?
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 29-3-2009 @ 10:23 AM by rich23
|
Yup. There are people here who say, give me $500 and I'll do you an alien, fine. Whether Reed would have the expertise to produce something is
highly debatable. and as you say, the more people involved in a hoax... I mean, it's not like he's got anything he can threaten them with if they
were helping him hoax and then blew the gaffe on him - unlike a government.
I don't know if you've seen the testimony of the two nice ladies, one of whom worked with him at the hospital and the other of whom handled his
account at the bank... but they seemed like really nice, ordinary people who were totally shocked by what had happened.
They might be acting, but if they're that good they ought to be picking up oscars.
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 29-3-2009 @ 01:17 PM by kshaund
|
I did see the video clip - their faces were not visible if I recall. Amazing how easy it is for someone to get written off, discredited in one way
therefore ALL of it must be wrong.
I think his story is worth a second go over for anyone who has decided it's a hoax. I haven't seen any sworn testimonies, just some names and
pictures and statements that he's a fraud. The photos of the ransacked house was also very convincing, especially when they said even the toilet was
lifted and cover plates removed from the switches, virtually everything that could conceivably hide anything was opened. I would never have thought to
hide anything in the toilet pipe until I saw that - so if its a hoax, these guys ALSO figured out how to dismantle a house beyond any ransacking.
A LOT of work, don't you think? Much easier to just turn over furniture and rip pictures off the wall and take a photo like ransackers normally do.
There's way too many unanswered questions to write it off. Now, what if it ISN'T a hoax and really is true? What are THOSE implications!?
I heard Reed say that "Freddy" the name given to this creature, has remained in contact with him but I can't find anything on the internet about it
and presume its in Reed's latest book? I don't know, but would like to find out if that's so.
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 1-4-2009 @ 03:08 PM by rundog
|
This a hoax with a capital H. Check on Reed. He is not any of the things he says he is. Doctor? NO. Check on those who have looked into him in great
detail. He is a liar.
Google has loads of proof on this hoax. Not worth any more time.
|
copyright & usage
|
|
AboveTopSecret.com is advertising supported.
|
reply posted on 1-4-2009 @ 04:16 PM by kidflash2008
|
reply to post by amfirst
Is Dr Reed back in the news? It is people like him who take away any credibility left from the ufology community. Calling UFO Watchdog a disinfo site
because they caught him in his lies is not good research. Here is the site if it has not already been posted:
www.ufowatchdog.com...
He is like the Bigfoot hunter who found the body of a Bigfoot in Georgia. Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me!
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 1-4-2009 @ 06:11 PM by kshaund
|
I re-post what I said earlier about my take after looking through the entire ufowatchdog website a few days ago - especially regarding Village Labs
where I was for an entire evening with Jim and he showed us all his computers used for movies and analyzing ufo footage. Why would ufowatchdog post as
fact he is a fraud when I know from personal experience it isn't fact? Hmmm.... !
Originally posted by kshaund
Well, after looking through all those links I also looked through ufowatchdog.com's website as well. Re Jonathon Reed/Rutter - I am not convinced it
is a hoax - my question remaining is whether or not there ever was a dog Suzy - I believe there is some newer stuff from Jonathon Reed, the dog
question is the biggest one that sticks out. Because of mind control, etc. I don't believe a lot of peoples testimonies one way or another. And I
have seen people's good work get torn apart.
What I noticed going through the ufowatchdog website is:
Often in their Hall of Shame write-ups the words "allegedly" and "claimed" were used in describing reasons to write- off people's work.
Some people were written off in the hall of shame because they had particular beliefs, like Shirley Maclaine.
Often they refer to some of the hall of shamers as getting rich off their books - I have worked around several historical people in the ufo circuit -
and no one gets rich off selling a few books.
Some were criticized because they sold anything at all - why shouldn't they? People don't have to 'buy' a thing and they have to eat too.
Re Jim Dilettoso - I was with others and spent an evening in the Village Labs at Jim Dilettoso's invitation. We were given a tour of all their
computers and production rooms and it was an incredible place. So what does that say about his induction into the hall of shame? ps - everyone has
some skeletons in their closet, that doesn't mean their entire lives are a lie.
www.ufowatchdog.com...
JIM DILETTOSO
Endorsed Billy Meier photos as genuine. Reportedly used NASA letterhead with his name typed on it, never worked for NASA. Claimed to have worked on
the movie 'Titanic', studio said "Never heard of him" and no credits are listed under his name for that movie. Dilettoso even endorsed the
fraudulent Oliver's Castle footage as authentic. One of many morons constantly contributing to the decline of UFOlogy. SEE: Phoenix New Times article
on Dilettoso and a scathing article exposing Dilettoso. You can view Dilettoso's self authored bio here and his so-called Village Labs here.
She's in the hall of shame because she's a media entrepreneur? 
Her credibility has gone downhill because "she sensationalizes everything from MUNDANE ANIMAL DEATHS..." Since when is cattle mutilation mundane and
something that should be talked about in a subdued manner....
LINDA MOULTON HOWE
Someone once summed up Howe very well with two words: ' Media entrepreneur '. While having been a major player in the cattle mutilation mystery,
Howe's credibility has gone way down hill as she sensationalizes everything from mundane animal deaths to promoting Brazilian UFO fraud Urandir
Oliveira and the Aztec UFO Crash Hoax while selling alien books, videos and lectures. Howe dabbles in all things strange including bigfoot, crop
circles, alien abductions, and UFOs. Howe also sits on the board of advisors to the Roswell UFO Museum along with the likes of Don Schmitt. See
Howe's site, which she actually charges a subscription for in order to access some stories. Also see Howe turning an explained animal death into an
encounter with bigfoot. A leap not even bigfoot itself could make. Also see Aliens Abducted My Common Sense, and a report lifting the mythos behind
Howe's much touted and promoted Roswell UFO debris.
Is Reed's stuff real? I still tend towards yes but am open to the possibility that it was a great hoax rather than an even greater dis-credit
campaign.
[edit on 1-4-2009 by kshaund]
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 1-4-2009 @ 06:20 PM by kshaund
|
You know, it's amazing even to me that people are dissed and dismissed without REALLY digging to the REAL BOTTOM of it!
I am certainly NOT convinced it IS a hoax - only ones doing the convincing are other "people" saying things. No one's taken apart the videos
professionally. No ones tried to duplicate the alien or the bracelet. I mean really - if you're going to discredit someone, do it from certainty of
your research, not someone else's.
I asked for links where he was discredited and get the ufowatchdog etc which aren't (in my opinion) anywhere near enough to be a platform to write
off this guys story.
Where's the photo analyses of debunking the photos of the craft? Is there one?!? Those are things I'm interested in - not opinions and 'possible'
misinformants.
Sorry - just had to get this rant out!
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 1-4-2009 @ 08:21 PM by SumnerKagan
|
The creature is a fake.
www.youtube.com...
Watch the video, and at about 5 minutes and 15 seconds in, he begins to "turn" the head of the creature.
Note the area of the neck that has been highlighted.
There are contours present on the neck, that seem to represent carotid artery.
As the head is turned, instead of stretching and deforming, the artery and contours remain exactly the same. This is because this feature:
1. Is a solid part of the "sculpture".
and
2. The neck is not connected to anything below the collar of the shirt.
Fake head.
Sorry.
[edit on 1-4-2009 by SumnerKagan]
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 2-4-2009 @ 09:10 AM by kshaund
|
reply to post by SumnerKagan
This again is opinion - no disrespect intended at all as opinions are important, I just don't take them as the final say - what about the ship?? What
about the audio sounds? What about earlier photos of him with a dog?
You (general you) can't debunk one part and be satisfied - there's way too many other questions in my opinion that haven't remotely been answered.
Like I said before, I've seen very good people taken down overnight because of disinformation - it happens all too often so I'm just not willing to
say "it's a hoax" based on opinions....
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 2-4-2009 @ 10:27 AM by rich23
|
reply to post by kshaund
Billy Meier's photos - the ones I've seen at any rate - are a little disappointing, but the vitriol that guy gets is way disproportionate. Again,
some people get attacked so viciously (and in the case of Dr. Reed, dubiously) that you can't help suspecting an agenda there.
Again, where do UFOwatchdog get their money? Are there lots of people out there chipping in to their brave efforts to "maintain standards" in
UFOlogy? I claim that that's their aim simply because one of their frequent allegations is that people are bringing UFOlogy into disrepute. And
that just always makes me laugh.
As for Linda Moulton Howe - a brief digression. One thing I've noticed in my reading of "the Mammoth Encyclopaedia of Extraterrestrial
Encounters", which I regard as a handy first reference tome and nothing more, is that cattle mutilations, as described in Howe's An Alien
Harvest, have no connection with UFOs. You have to look up "animal mutilations", which is hardly the most obvious term, and you get a little
snippet written by Jim and Coral Lorenzen, founders of APRO, that dismisses it all being done by a Satanic cult.
Weird, huh?
Lorenzen died in 1988. The book was published in 2001. It's a compendium of stuff from different authors, and cattle mutilation gets far less
coverage than, say, "Demonic Theory of UFOs" and other stuff that I personally would say was less evidence-driven and more trivial.
I also found this page which details testimony given to them from various
soruces that the craft observed by Lonnie Zamora in Soccorro was seen to land at Holliman AFB.
My suspicious mind says that that's disinfo to support the "experimental craft"/one of ours explanation for that sighting.
All very odd.
|
copyright & usage
|
|
AboveTopSecret.com is advertising supported.
|
reply posted on 2-4-2009 @ 10:30 AM by amfirst
|
His story eventhough out of this world, he makes a lot of sense in what he says, it's easy to tell if a person is a liar.
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 2-4-2009 @ 03:48 PM by kidflash2008
|
reply to post by kshaund
Dr Jonathan Reed was called out on his fraud. He tried to pull one over on the gullible ufology community. Instead of calling UFO Watchdog a disinfo
site and blaming them, find evidence to support Dr Reed's claims. Sumner Kagan found a very good mistake on the alien "body". He showed the
mistake, and proves it is a fake. It is not an opinion when the evidence is presented to back up the claim.
It seems many want to believe all the UFO and fringe stuff out there. The way to get to the bottom of it is to closely check out those stories and
videos of aliens. If one takes things at face value, then the alien autopsy videos are the greatest find ever. If one does the homework and examines
things thoroughly, they find out the autopsy videos are a modern day act of a charlatan who wants to make money from a gullible public.
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 2-4-2009 @ 03:55 PM by amfirst
|
reply to post by kidflash2008
UFO Watchdog is a bunch of cr2p...prove that any of those disinfo is true...it all hersay...
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 3-4-2009 @ 09:18 AM by kshaund
|
Originally posted by kidflash2008
reply to post by kshaund
Dr Jonathan Reed was called out on his fraud. He tried to pull one over on the gullible ufology community. Instead of calling UFO Watchdog a disinfo
site and blaming them, find evidence to support Dr Reed's claims. Sumner Kagan found a very good mistake on the alien "body". He showed the
mistake, and proves it is a fake. It is not an opinion when the evidence is presented to back up the claim.
It seems many want to believe all the UFO and fringe stuff out there. The way to get to the bottom of it is to closely check out those stories and
videos of aliens. If one takes things at face value, then the alien autopsy videos are the greatest find ever. If one does the homework and examines
things thoroughly, they find out the autopsy videos are a modern day act of a charlatan who wants to make money from a gullible public.
I haven't come across Sumner Kagan - any references to his analysis? It still doesn't explain the ship, the sounds... ? I'm not for or against,
I'm just not satisfied it's a hoax on the surface because others say so...
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 3-4-2009 @ 10:53 AM by rundog
|
Hey, if I had an alien in my woods, then in my freezer, I WOULDN'T HAVE ANY TROUBLE CONVINCING THE ENTIRE WORLD THAT I HAD HIM!!!
My cameras wouldn't be set to PERMANENT OUT OF FOCUS AND BLUR EITHER! I also wouldn't hang out with a bunch of fringe group blokes of doubtful
character. My gosh people, this guy is a bum!
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 3-4-2009 @ 10:59 AM by kshaund
|
reply to post by SumnerKagan
Well, I just looked at this three times and have to say I disagree - I see the neck moving with the head - all parts. It doesn't look phoney or fake
or stationary to me.
|
copyright & usage
|
|
AboveTopSecret.com is advertising supported.
|
reply posted on 9-8-2009 @ 05:08 AM by adspie
|
so if Jonathan Rutter "Reed" are credible, why he doesnt show the bracelet that can teleport, where is the video or the proof there... he is pure
BS!
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 9-8-2009 @ 05:30 AM by ZombieOctopus
|
Is this tool back again? The whole Reed hoax isn't even a very good hoax, it's pathetic. Give a 12 year old some paper mache and digital camera and
he/she would bring you something better than his garbage. His whole life has been shown to be a fraud over and over again, just do some searches. If
you're too gullible to see the obvious truth, just try and find his PhD thesis... oh wait, he doesn't have one, he's not a doctor. 
Edit: Why are you bumping all these Reed threads?? Let them die!! D:
[edit on 8/9/2009 by ZombieOctopus]
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 9-8-2009 @ 05:40 AM by Sam60
|
I think I'm onto something.....
Reed / Rutter......
...is really.....
"Never fear, Reed is here"
[edit on 9-8-2009 by Sam60]
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 18-10-2009 @ 02:38 PM by ChipDouglasManOfAction
|
reply to post by amfirst
This case just has way too much evidence to be brushed off as a supposed 'hoax'. There are just too many key witnesses verifiying all aspects of
this case. Too many verifiable sources like the Catholic University of P.R. verifying Harold Chacon.
I personally think with all the surrounding disinformation placed out there concerning Jonathan Reed that those sites that have been dedicated to
calling Jonathan Reed a hoax have inadvertantly made people believe this case is absolutely real. Once those people could see the same responses from
skeptics it became apparent that those groups of skeptics could not rationally discuss the evidence itself. I think more people are believing this
case based solely off of the ridiculous non-discussion skeptics never seem to what to go into. Dan McEvoy's credentials are pretty out-standing. It
makes no logical rational sense for him to be supposedly helping to do some supposed 'hoaxing' with Dr. Reed. None of that adds up to reasonable
logic. The only thing that does add up is that this case is absolutely 500% REAL. I think even after blocking people from websites and banning people
from their freedom to speak out concerning their support of J. Reed that the disinformation will always help to bring more people to the truth of this
incredible case in history.
I think even when the skeptics asked to see papers or documents concerning the analysist of the link artifact or papers showing test results of the
genetic material those same skeptics have readied a response which will then make claim that the documents or papers are doctored, or in other words
phoney papers. These skeptics always seem to have a readied response to the contrary and that they dont care about the reality of this case. It seems
the only thing these skeptics are concerned about is shutting people up and labelling the importance of the most incredible alien encounter in human
history not real. And that is sad.
|
copyright & usage
|
|
